Topic: [ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency - page 1610. (Read 9723926 times)

Everyone cares about Dash.
I like it a lot 

I wonder why iCEBREAKER would delete this post from his self moderated thread ?.....

************************************ DELETED POST ************************************

Although it's possibly true that Dash's beginnings will 'follow it around', this isn't going to prevent people from investing in it, for two reasons:

[1] - the developer didn't slope off and leave the project. He stuck with it - now for nearly 2 years and no sign of stopping - and produced one of the most fundamental innovations in crypto by articulating the blockchain protocol while leaving it decentralised

[2] - the market for wider (mass) adoption isn't a few readers on bitcointalk, it's the uninitiated public 'out there' to whom the whole of crypto is "instamined". Ask any of them if they think bitcoin's distribution is "fair" - I have and the answer's always the same

On that second point, the reason it is so is that miners don't hold their supply - they dump it into markets where the holdings get consolidated. There are even services telling you which coins to mine-to-dump right now. So, even though I wasn't there at the start, Dash's beginnings didn't affect me and they don't now. I do not regard them as unethical, or even a 'handicap' because I'm not investing in the past, I'm investing in the future and whatever its beginnings there is no alternative to Dash - there's only the one. It's unique.

Thats the reason it's retained its relative marketcap no matter what amount of mundane troll droning goes on in the background from people who claim their noses are out of joint over the launch. Charlie Lee says that Dash's early beginnings make it "difficult to support". Well I can understand such a remark coming from him and it's probably well founded from a coin dev's point of view. But I am an investor and have different priorities, as will every other investor who comes after me.

The merits of the work currently going on in Dash and its potential to further distinguish its market presence now far outweigh the coin supply issues at launch and will only continue to grow in dominance.

As for its 'technology', it has the right technology for the job it's doing which is to address three principle monetary shortfalls while retaining its inheritance of bitcoin's public blockchain protocol:

[1] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near instant confirmations

[2] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near perfect fungibility

[3] - the ability of crypto to function as a new form of electronic cash by supporting near perfect transparency and accountability

Whatever the shortfalls in Darksend right now and other areas of Dash's performance, it keeps getting closer to those monetary objectives with every 6 months of new revisions. That is progress which is declared and delivered rather than just talked about which is why most of Dash's core investors stick with it.

Bitcoin is not getting closer to thes objectives. Bitcoin 2.0 coins are targeting all kinds of other services aside from currency, and Cryptonote simply picked the wrong monetary model - a credit one instead of a cash one - on which to base its privacy properties which is why it's heading rapidly into oblivion before they can even get to first base in terms of user-oriented adoption tools.

So that leaves Dash as the closest true competitor which inherits bitcoin's codebase while offering a radical and successful alternative approach. It DOES massively improve confirmation time. It DOES resolve the fungibility issue and it DOES maintain bitcoin's level of transparency and accountability.

Having achieved those objectives at all is pretty outstanding. Dash now has the luxury of time with which to improve and consolidate the manner on HOW it achieves them.

Thats what people are going to be investing in from now on.

Miners still need to validate transactions that go in a block.  If the masternodes order and lock every transaction, there is very little way to game a system like this.  Also the 45% block reward for miners could probably be reduced to 5% and still maintain security.  Now there is a remaining 40% of block rewards that can be used for something more useful than paying electric bills.  With a low mining reward there will probably not be a market to produce and X11 ASIC either.

Evan has said the fees are moving to the merchant/receiver end - so maybe it is still per transaction.

I haven't heard of china miners not being able to package blocks.  Some miners are not validating the transactions in a block, it gives them a few second edge on each block and usually will work.  If another pool or wallet rejects a block, then those miners not validating lose that block.

It is fun to speculate on the evolution revolution.

Eventually, the miners will come up with the hashes that are used to build the quorums, but will have no control over what is included in the blockchain, thus eliminating the > 50% hash attack vector.  The double layer of hash and quorums will be infinitely more secure than POW alone.  I don't know how that will play out in hash rate/rewards, but I do see that when ASICs come online, it won't be a threat like it was for Bitcoin and Litecoin, etc... It'll just be a change.

I do see an issue though.  Who will set the rates for inclusion into the blockchain?  With a flexible block size and a network that is paid to store the blockchain in a distributed manner, does it matter?  Do we need fees?  Hummmm?

I guess we do, because no matter how much traffic the network can take, it should have a way to reduce unnecessary spam.  But If this is somewhat how it'll go, I wonder if the fee will now be set by the MN quorums?  Also, the blocks will get to be huge, and I remember reading that China's miners can't package up a block fast enough because of their limited bandwidth.  So question is, will this become a problem?

Wow, the more I think about this, the more I see what a challenge all this is

i think its kind of sad, considering thats likely what he did last time with his coin of choice...

LOL, at least he's being a funny asshole there

LOL, Well, if you want to listen to this old dingbat's explanation, I'll give it a go for you

First, I don't know how IP blinding will work, but there will be blinding.  And I'm pretty sure we'll still be mixing our coins and probably no need for as many times as we do now because of the blinding.  Evan said all coins are going to be IX, and instantly spendable.  So I'm going to guess that mixing will be instant, as it's basically the same as a transaction, and instantly spendable.  And since many transactions can happen at one time between each block and since the Masternode network will be split up into many quorums, many transactions can be completed per second.  Thus I can see it all as virtually instantaneous to human senses.

Well, I hope that helped

Edited, hopefully for clarity.

Note:  Hum, sounds like magic, so I'm sure I'm off somewhere, LOL.  Maybe the coins have to wait for one block or something to be spent, I don't know???

Don't ask me how I do such stupid things, but yes, I looked at the supply and thought marketcap, in a completely different collumn, then at Dash's market cap.  Supid stupid stupid, LOL.  We're still way ahead in security, IMO

Bitcoin is only 5.3 Billion.  Coinmarketcap does all the calculations for you.
http://coinmarketcap.com/

Bitcoin Marketcap = $5000 million
Dash marketcap = $14 million

5000/14=357

...or, marketcap normalised to BTC...

Bitcoin Marketcap = 14823125 BTC
Dash marketcap = 41148 BTC

14823125 / 41148 = 360

(You confused the coin supply with the marketcap).

Wait, if they're at 14 billion, and we're at 14 million, that's 0.001 of their market cap, No?  or .1% ?  Damn, am I still screwing up?

I really am a dingbat, I looked at Bitcoin supply, and Dash marketcap, how do I look at two different columns?  Ugh!  I'm senile!

So Dash has about 240X more nodes per market cap than Bitcoin.  Nice.

I will comment on security by miners.  The amount of hashpower(electricity) is proportional to the marketcap(coin price).  As Dash price goes up, it is more profitable to mine and more security/miners will be added to the network.  The Bitcoin network has about $1,280,000/day in security by miners, Dash has $10,500/day in security.  This doesn't include the cost to acquire the miners either which is about 500x the 1 day electric cost.  So an attacker would need $640,000,000(1/8 of marketcap) just to get close to 50%, and Dash $5,000,000(1/3 of the marketcap).

That does raise the question, if Dash takes off and matches the BTC marketcap now, how much would be spent on miners/security.  The answer is $3,759,000/day.  We could reduce the miner share of blockrewards so that millions/day are not just thrown at electricity to power miners.  This isn't just an ASIC will solve it problem either.  Even with ASICs, eventually more ASICs would be added to use the same electric usage as the value of coins produced.  And maybe with a $5 billion marketcap a $3.8 million electric bill is the right amount.  Personally, I think it would be be more beneficial to move some miners % at that point to the budget and vote on projects for the community.

Disclaimers:  No ASICs are availabe for Dash, nor do I expect them soon.  Actual mining electric cost will be less than the value of coins mined to allow for a profit.

I can't help you with that, couldn't remember that evan told more details about that. We have to be patient I guess. There is still a danger of ideas getting stolen.

It just will!

Geez, why the fuck do you keep asking stupid questions? Evan is making discoveries every day (4 discoveries yesterday) and you're here asking questions. Your questions are not appreciated and will NOT BE ANSWERED. I hope that's clear.

Listen. Just sell your house, your car, your wife's jewelry, deplete all your savings, max out your credit cards, and use it all to buy DASH. And tell all your friends to do the same thing otherwise you're a TROLL and we'll put you on ignore.

That 1% actually happened back in May 2014. BTC was around 7bn marketcap and DRK was ~70mn.

Same for March 2015, when BTC was around 3.5bn marketcap and newly rebranded DASH took off to 35-38mn. I think it peaked at something like 1.1%.

My bad, I was mistaking price and marketcap.

Do we have any information about how it will work though?

Will be much better. Transactions are anon by default, instant (no hours of waiting for mixing), no fees.

So whats happening with anonymity in evolution? Do we know anything about that yet?

I make it 0.28% (1/358)

Easiest way to remember it is it's just under 3 thousandths.